- Joined
- Jan 27, 2011
- Messages
- 39,195
- Reaction score
- 9,689
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
if it was split into pieces, the Food stamp cuts would die a slow death of being pidgin holed in the senate. besides boehner would not dare separate the farm bill into peices, because he will draw the wrath of the conservatives for not including the draconian cuts they want and also draw the wrath of the agricultural buissness and their allies in congress who actually want a deal done.
If this were true, why not put it up for a vote? Republicans have more votes in the House than Democrats do. If it's truly about Republicans doing what you say, then the bill would not pass a vote. So why not put it up for a vote?It more shows that the Republicans are at least holding up the Liberal Agenda in destroying America.
Otherwise known as 'The American People".
:roll:
3%? THREE PERCENT is draconian? Maybe you havent noticed but we are approaching $17,000,000,000,000.00 in the hole.
Secondly Ag subsidies need to be tamed as well. From ethanol to soil banking, it needs to stop being supported by government money.
boehner's leadership skills are hardly impressive.
Farm bill decision looms for Boehner - The Hill's On The Money
Answer the question.
Is 3% draconian?
Your rhetoric outraced your common sense.
Read more: John Boehner: No House vote on Senate immigration bill - Ginger Gibson - POLITICO.com
And we are back to the Republican house holding everything up again. Back to the good ol do nothing congress.. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Read more: John Boehner: No House vote on Senate immigration bill - Ginger Gibson - POLITICO.com
And we are back to the Republican house holding everything up again. Back to the good ol do nothing congress.. [/FONT][/COLOR]
and Boehner continues to show how he is the most inept house speaker in recent memory. He is a prisoner to his caucus.
Same for the immigration bill Zyph, Obama wants it all passed together so he can give the carrots and burn the sticks.
See, that's the issue OC.
The "Carrots", other than simply being able to stya here, can't legally be enacted BY THIS LAW without the "Sticks" occuring. It would take an entirely new law amending this one to allow the end game "carrots" of a green card to occur without the sticks happening.
That's total bull****, he caves enough. When's the last time Reid gave in on something, hmmmm? I'll wait.
If this bill contained the right security features, seems the conservatives would vote for it. So why aren't they?
If this bill contained the right security features, seems the conservatives would vote for it. So why aren't they?
Because the bill only provided lip-service to those security features, and as has occurred in the past, and is really only an amnesty bill.
There is nothing to prohibit the President from selectively applying amnesty, while ignoring government's obligation to border security and policing, which by right of the Constitution does not even actually reside with the federal government itself, but with the various States.
In short, it is nothing but more of the same, but now validating the same corruption under law, while giving aliens far more benefits than even U.S. citizens have, and creating an enormous budget liability for no benefit -- despite the bullcrap that the GAO indicates.
And ultimately the enormous influx of nuevo citizens will totally skew the election process, making it impossible for our Republican system of governance to operate, exclusing those promoting this country's founding principles from being elected to anything above dog catcher, and ensuring our headlong plunge into not just Socialism, but Marxism and globalist dictate.
Not only should it not be voted for, but those promoting it should be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. This is not just a differing political perspective, but rather is the difference between our government acting legitimately, or acting in disregard for the general welfare of the union, the sovereignty of the several States, and the citizens themselves. It is nothing short of deliberate, calculating Treason.
Why can't border security and immigration reform be done at the same time? What security issues are left to be addressed?
Because we have an established history of, not only this Oval Occupant, but previous Presidents having selectively applied the laws, under discretionary application, and not engaging what is stated under the law.
Because border security has long had an obligation to be fulfilled, has been unconstitutionally denied the authority of the various States with the real territory being invaded, but has not been exercised by the federal government for decades. There is no assurance, much less obligation, that the Congress and Executive will be compelled to fulfill the recognitions regarding establishing real border security
Because despite the repeated claim of needing urgent immigration reform, there is never any real indication of why this immigration reform is necessary, much less urgent.
Because this immigration de facto amnesty not only overwhelms our already overburdened infrastructure and social services, but also entirely corrupts our electoral process, further corrupts our corrupt health care usurpation, and doesn't do a damn thing to solve any real problems, but will rather only exacerbate those problems, inclusive of creating even more pathways of chain immigration uncontrolled alien entry into this country.
The only thing this immigration reform does is give illegal aliens a legal status in this country, along with entitlement to social services and benefits, even above and beyond longstanding U.S. citizens.
This immigration reform does not solve any problems at all but actually only worsens existing problems, while creating whole new problems, corruptions, and avenues of entry into the country while creating an enormous economic hazard and obligation.
THe fact is that illegal aliens not having any legal status in this country, is not a problem at all, but rather a necessary fact that is crucial to our national security and sovereignty.
There is nothing to prohibit the President from selectively applying amnesty, while ignoring government's obligation to border security and policing, which by right of the Constitution does not even actually reside with the federal government itself, but with the various States.
See, this is what I'm not getting.
The law CLEARLY indicates that amnesty is not possible unless those metrics are met. For Obama to just "selectively apply" it, he'd be acting outside of what the law actually allows. If he wanted to do that, he could just do that NOW. The law specifically limits amnesty from being available UNTIL those security triggers are met to my understanding.
Unless you're referring to Amnesty as the RPI status...the status that allows them to legally stay in the country but doesn't grant them citizenship or a green card. Is that what you're referring to as "amnesty" rather than the portion that allows them to become a citizen?
I would say that one of my issues with this bill is I believe if the triggers AREN'T met by a certain time, than the RPI status should no longer be applicable and we should be using the information we gathered through registering as an RPI to find and deport those that would now once again be illegal. The "Trigger" needs to have a "result" both for if it IS met (they can begin the process of citizenship) and if it is NOT met (we begin deporting)
What is the budget for the SNAP program.
See, this is what I'm not getting.
The law CLEARLY indicates that amnesty is not possible unless those metrics are met. For Obama to just "selectively apply" it, he'd be acting outside of what the law actually allows. If he wanted to do that, he could just do that NOW. The law specifically limits amnesty from being available UNTIL those security triggers are met to my understanding.
Unless you're referring to Amnesty as the RPI status...the status that allows them to legally stay in the country but doesn't grant them citizenship or a green card. Is that what you're referring to as "amnesty" rather than the portion that allows them to become a citizen?
I would say that one of my issues with this bill is I believe if the triggers AREN'T met by a certain time, than the RPI status should no longer be applicable and we should be using the information we gathered through registering as an RPI to find and deport those that would now once again be illegal. The "Trigger" needs to have a "result" both for if it IS met (they can begin the process of citizenship) and if it is NOT met (we begin deporting)
Dont answer a question with another question. Is a 3% cut draconian?
Im asking you. So either you believe it is, which makes your rhetoric look silly, or it isnt and the cuts on the table arent draconian.
So answer the question and think instead of parroting a buzzword.
Dont answer a question with another question. Is a 3% cut draconian?
Im asking you. So either you believe it is, which makes your rhetoric look silly, or it isnt and the cuts on the table arent draconian.
So answer the question and think instead of parroting a buzzword.
The bill clearly and undeniably does not have any amnesty contingent upon any "metrics", ad repeatedly refused ANY and ALL amendments that required such security be met prior to acting on Amnesty.
Obama would be acting outside of the law, and Obama HAS DONE THAT NOW with creating his own selective deportation standards, and claiming it is his authority under discretionary enforcement.
Allow illegal aliens to remain in the country, is granting them legal status, ... to "legally stay in the country", as well as benefits.
Those "triggers" themselves are a joke, and each subject to discretion and corruption, and intentionally written to be corrupted.
We should commence deportation now, along with the wall construction and other border security implementation, and then, and only then, begin to discuss what adjustments immigration law might need. But it certainly would not involve any enormous thorough restructuring resulting in a 2,000 page bill.
Because the two are not mutually inclusive, as the 20 million thieving illegals who trespassed into America are not immigrants, because the only way to be an immigrant in America is to be granted that status by the INS ..Why can't border security and immigration reform be done at the same time?
In addition to securing the borders to keep trespassers from getting in ..What security issues are left to be addressed?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?